“LEARNING ORGANISATIONS”
In his well-received book, The Fifth Discipline, Peter Senge promotes the value of the so-called “Learning Organisation” as an essential ingredient in organisational change. While Senge has undoubtedly contributed much to a greater understanding of the concept and the benefits of adhering to it, the concept itself is not new. It was, for example, positively canvassed by pioneers in organisational cultural studies such as Edgar Schein and Chris Argyris. Both these authors and Senge talk extensively about the need to encourage the development of individuals within the organisation, ‘development’ meaning the learning potential of individuals – and, therefore, the learning potential of the total organisation.
‘Learning’ is about learning new behaviours that should be encouraged in the organisation and it involves encouraging groups of people, small groups, large groups, in those behaviours. It is about the formation of groups to allow and encourage dialogue – a discussion between people about all possible topics affecting an organisation and the individuals within it. It’s about discussion of things that everyone talks about in the corridors. It’s about discussion of things that are, perhaps, ‘taboo’ in the organisation. It is about talking about these taboos and what they represent in the organisation. It is about allowing discussion on any topic or any issue that may be affecting the organisation, either at the time, previously or in the future. This sort of discussion allows people to be honest and up-front about what they think and feel about things.
Normally it is a somewhat tentative group which starts off, and it will probably take around six months to start to produce some results in terms of change in the organisation. These groups eventually become the ‘norm’ within the organisation and the rest of the organisation picks up on the discussions which take place in these groups, as well as from the participants when they leave the discussion group and discuss the matters further with other staff. This ‘corridor talk’ then becomes ordinary everyday discussion in the organisation, which leads to even more discussion and more managing upwards of issues, including ideas that normally may not be discussed with superiors. It leads to less fear in discussing taboo issues as well. It leads to less fear because staff feel that it is appropriate to talk about taboo topics since they are being talked about by everyone in the groups and these groups have been encouraged by senior management, including the CEO. Since it is ‘ok’ to talk about issues, there is no more fear about doing so. If these groups did not exist and you relied solely on your management structure, it is unlikely that this would be enough to overcome the inherent fear in most organisations, fear of the top management, in particular, and fear of saying things that are “not appropriate”, or of expressing a contrary view.
But surely the concept of groups of people sitting around talking ad nauseam about vague issues is in conflict with the notion of an efficient, lean, tightly managed, focussed organisation. Yes, it is in conflict and this is one of the problems those used to Western cultures have. We spend all our time working, working, busy, busy, processing, processing, no time, working and not reflecting on what is happening, not reflecting on what we are doing, not reflecting on what we should be doing, not reflecting on how better to do things. These discussion groups should address these matters, as well as other issues and taboo topics, trying to look at things in a different way. This is where real efficiencies are gained, through this discussion. It is part of Eastern cultures to have discussions such as this. Better results can be achieved if we use both the Eastern and Western cultural modes of working. This will then increase the efficiency of the organisation in the short term as well as in the long term.
“So what?” you might still be saying. What if people do sit around all day and discuss all these issues and maybe feel better about it, what does all that mean to the organisation? How does that make the organisation more successful, more profitable, more focussed or whatever? Let’s answer in the negative. If your organisation doesn’t have these processes (and most organisations don’t), it still functions, it still produces results, it still makes a profit, it continues to exist, it still may even be perceived externally as being successful, and some are. However, there are limitations placed on the staff in the organisation, and that limit is that they can only develop so far, they cannot grow beyond their duty statement or position description or strict cultural roles.
In a learning organisation, staff are encouraged to learn and perform beyond their formal position descriptions, that is the difference. This means they are allowed and actually given permission to think laterally, to think beyond what they are doing, to think about why they are doing what they are doing and to even think about whether they should be doing that at all. That is the essence of a learning organisation.
